The book does not feel partisan, but is it direct. Exactly what we do about our economy and climate will be a matter of debate, but the writers insist that we are running unsustainable deficits, and it is getting hotter (backed by all science, except a few deniers usually found on Fox. Remember, there were some researchers who said smoking wasn't really a big deal too). It is easy to pick on teenagers as impulsive and incapable of delayed gratification, but adults in this country seem to want it all. Higher wages and lower taxes. Lower energy costs and higher credit limits. Wars waged with the hope of protecting the many, but that are shouldered by only a few (who sacrifice, suffer, and die while the majority pays no cost). The optimistic view is that, as we cut spending and raise taxes, we can make smarter investments in infrastructure and research that will act as catalysts for the economy.
But what gets cut? Some politicians talk about spending cuts to get votes, but don't come through on specifics. Do we cut the military budget? Decrease/Change Social Security and Medicare benefits? Those are big line items. Or do we scour the books for smaller cuts: a few million here, a few million there (or 10s of millions / 100s of millions)? And the tax structure? I hear some argue the business tax rates are too high, but there are so many loopholes that major corporations pay next to nothing. Why do major oil companies and agribusiness conglomerates still get subsidies? I heard a billionaire being interviewed from his private jet say that he has no problem paying more individual/business taxes as long as his business is growing. That requires that those in the 99% have money too spend. Reminder: Reagan raised taxes five times. While I don't mean to demonize him, the right has sanitized him to the point of sainthood.
The authors concede that the Republicans, in limiting collective bargaining rights and decreasing benefits for public employees, are attempting to weaken (destroy) the democratic base of support.
However, they don't let us off the hook. When teaching salaries were lower, job stability and benefits made the total compensation worthwhile. But as wages have increased, people are much more certain that they know we are compensated too generously. Granted, things are different in different parts of the country. All teachers have not seen their wages increase, and many have been furloughed. However, for the most part, much of the stability remains and (locally) the benefits are substantial. Should we be expected to pay more for the same coverage? Some days, I would point out that no one in the private sector would offer to reduce his or her overall compensation voluntarily. Other days, I feel so lucky that I have access the highest-quality coverage that I don't mind paying a little more. Many public sector employees have made concessions around the country, but if the goal is more political than financial, the attacks will continue. So, questions abound: Should Illinois police and firefighters be able to retire at 75% of their pay at age 50? Should the retirement age be pushed back? Should benefits be decreased? Yeah, Obamacare, but what about universal health care? How can the healthcare system be made even more effective and efficient? Should pensions be reduced for future employees? Who should pay more taxes? Politicians get elected by promising to give things to people; however,
"For the next decade at least, to be a mayor, governor, college
president, or president of the United States will mean, on more days and
in more ways, taking things away from people."
Post 1: OODA Loop
ReplyDeleteAs Friedman and Mandelbaum estabablish the foundation of their book, they point to the failures of our political system.
In particular, they discuss the OODA loop – a strategic idea from John Boyd of the U.S. Air Force. Essentially, if a fighter pilot assesses a dogfight more quickly, he should end up victorious. The problem with America is that the OODA loop is too slow – mainly due to politicians “shouting, asserting, dividing and postponing.” I absolutely agree with that statement. And recently, I read a Washington Post article about “14 Reasons why this is the worst Congress ever” and the third item on the list is “They’re incredibly polarized.” I feel like this fits right in with the OODA. Politics has become an infantile, elementary school playground of impotent stand-offs.
How can America rebuild when everyone is too busy expelling bombast. How can politicians “observe, orient, decide and act” when all they really do is engage in “sound-bite” politics?
Post 2: Ignoring Our Problems
ReplyDeleteTF and MM state the national debt as of June 15, 2011 stood at $14,344,566,636,826.26. In the words of Ernie Hudson’s character in Ghostbusters, “That’s a big Twinkie.” At the rate we’re going, it might as well read infinity. You’d think that this number alone would motivate the politicians in this country to actually get things done.
I like how TF and MM talk tough in this chapter. They make the point that Americans “must spend less and save more and accept higher taxes.” In fact, they mention the Rasmussen Report from November 19, 2010 that found while 37% of Americans felt the country’s best days lay ahead, an overwhelming 47% thought that this country’s best days had already passed. As a teacher of American Literature, the father of two boys and the son of an Italian immigrant, this is a sad reality. It’s not the American I grew up in and it certainly is not the America I want my sons growing up in.
I’ve got no problem rolling up my sleeves and making sacrifices – it’s how I was raised. We lived WAY below our means, which was how my father PAID for all three kids to go to college without the use of financial aid. On a computer salesman’s salary no less. So – I tend to agree with their ideas of sacrifice being a necessary part of rebuilding. “Americans will have to pay more in taxes and accept less in benefits.” I get it. I just hope it’s done in an equitable manner. And as they remind us, it’s going to take a president (and congress for that matter) who has “the ability to summon the nation to renew its traditional formula at each critical turn in our history.” I only hope our current political system is open-minded enough to see the light.
Post 3 – Up in the Air
ReplyDeleteThe advent of the technology revolution has produced an increasingly connected world, but one that has essentially steamrolled and over-stimulated our students.
Many of us know what life was like before the tech-explosion. We actually checked out books from the library as our only means of research. Some of us are digital immigrants. We grew up in a world without computers or cell phones. Some of us are digital natives who think that anyone who had a MySpace account also rode to work on the back of a mule.
The fact is TF and MM point out the rapidly spreading global connectivity as a very serious wake up call for America. The fact that India “is adding 15-18 million cell-phone users a month” is mind-boggling. And the idea that “23 percent of the global population uses the Internet today, up from 12 percent in 2002” is enough to make you channel your inner Jonny Carson and remark, “I did not know that.” Clearly, the growth has been fascinating. The idea that Tom’s book The World is Flat was published in 2005 and is already partially antiquated is wild. In fact, he states, “… in 2005 Facebook didn’t exist for most people, “Twitter” was still a sound, the “cloud” was something in the sky, “3G” was a parking space, “applications” were what you sent to colleges, and “Skype” was a typo.” Unreal right? But what does it mean for education?
Just consider how many technological advancements were mentioned since 2005. How are we supposed to keep up with them ourselves? It’s impossible. I already feel like I’m too plugged in. How many apps do I need on my phone?
Most importantly, how am I going to help my students balance technology and use it “the right way” or “use it productively” if I’m usually buried in an avalanche of tech-stimulation already? And this is coming from a teacher of a CFF classroom who already incorporates technology in the classroom on a weekly basis.
Amidst all of these advancements, how can I “inspire all Americans to start something new, to add something extra, or adapt something old in whatever job they are doing” with all of the pressure to prepare kids to improve state test scores?
Post 4 – Homework X2
ReplyDeleteYou know it’s going to be a tough chapter when “even the nice schools aren’t good enough” even when they may “send kids like yours and mine on a good path.”
However, I know “too many kids are not living up to their intellectual or personal potential.” And I agree with the idea that “outstanding teachers and principals can make a huge difference in student achievement.”
And the urgings to “measure, develop and reward excellent teaching” sound good on paper. The problem is we are living in the world of NCLB-perpetuated hysteria. Once NCLB was initiated, the American public was given the green light to rampantly question teacher accountability. Emphasis placed on student test scores morphed into a grotesque demonizing of teachers. Pitch forks. Torches. Chanting.
In fact, this country is going to have to go through a complete lobotomy before any reform can take place. Before reasonable and rationale reform can take place. I’m not sure we have that kind of time though.
Oh – and I’m not drinking Michael Johnston’s Kool-Aid. Yes – while I concur with some of his sentiments, I just don’t trust him. Making “50% of every teacher’s and principal’s performance evaluation based on demonstrated student growth” sounds reasonable in theory, but then he closes the paragraph my saying,”THIS IS NOT MEANT AS A GOTCHA!”
Maybe not. But it WILL turn into a GOTCHA. If you have to tell me that, it’s already a GOTCHA.
That’s basically the same exact thing Agent Drew Rosenhaus said when T.O. was doing sit-ups on his front lawn instead of running pass patterns in training camp. He said, “Only good things can happen” if this dialogue is opened up.
The only thing I saw happen was the deterioration of the greatest Eagles team ever assembled.
Getting back to it, Johnston’s idea surrounding tenure would not work in this hypercritical education environment. “If you are rated ineffective for two years, you lose your tenure. That does not mean you lose your job; it just means you are on a one-year contract.”
Really? That’s all? Can you imagine the feeding frenzy that would ensue if students could smell your imminent demise? I’ve overheard students say as much in directed study. Just pack a bunch of chum in my scuba gear and drop me in the Great Barrier Reef.
Post 5 – Homework X4
ReplyDeleteOne of the essential components to improving education TF and MM promote is the importance of supportive communities and parents.
Will communities continue to be shortsighted? “Money may be saved in the short term by voting down tax increases to fund schools. But if that results in higher dropout rates and higher unemployment, the overall cost to the community will certainly be higher.” Will they ever get it? I hope so.
Similarly, the GDP stats from The Economic Impact of the Achievement Gap in America’s Schools echo this reality in staggering proportion. “If black and Latino student performance caught up with white students by 1998, the GDP would have been between $310 billion and $525 billion higher.” The need for funding and solutions is clearly evident.
The other interesting development in this chapter deals with the importance of parental involvement. And while I will probably never embody the parenting style of Chua – mainly because I’m too busy carving out my own existence – I am a firm believer in the importance of setting high expectations at home. Growing up, earning the Honor Roll was the minimum. Average grades were not acceptable. And it was my job to meet my teacher’s expectations – no matter how unfair I thought they were. TF and MM correctly assert, “When children come to school knowing that their parents have high expectations, it makes everything a teacher is trying to do easier and more effective. Self-esteem is important, but it is not an entitlement. It has to be earned.” Right on. Set the bar. Establish the “given” outcome until it’s no longer part of the discussion. It just is.
Further, I love the idea that “young people whose parents were involved with their education…performed better on the PISA test than those kids whose parents were not involved.” They paint the picture of parents simply asking about their school day. Sounds corny, but when I was a kid, we had dinner together every night. It gave all of us a chance to interact and catch up.
In addition, I think Finland is on to something with how they organize their end of year conferences. “Students meet with their teacher and parents together at the end of the year” to “discuss what they have accomplished and what they should have accomplished and set their goals for the next year.” Frank and honest dialogue would certainly be beneficial for all parties. And setting the time aside shows just how interested parents and students are in achievement. They are invested in it. Imagine if we did this with our students every year. Too much? Intimidating?
Or is it holding our students and parents accountable?